<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC>
<html lang="en" lang="en">

<head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
    <title>
        Footnotes
    </title>

    <!-- Paged js-->
    <script src="../../../dist/paged.polyfill.js"></script>
    <style>


        body {
            widows: 1;
            orphans: 1;
        }

        @media screen {
            .pagedjs_page {
                box-shadow: 0 0 0 1px rgba(0, 0,0,0.2);
            }
        }

        .footnote {
            font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
            font-size: 12px;
            line-height: 14px;
            margin-top: 16px;
            color: grey;
        }


        @page {
            size: 160mm 210mm;
            margin-top: 83px;
            margin-bottom: 86px;
            margin-left: 35mm;
            margin-right: 35mm;
            
            @bottom-left{
                content: counter(page);
            }

            @footnote {
                border-top: dashed red 1px;
                margin-top: 12px;
                float: bottom;
            }
        }

        span.footnote { 
            float: footnote;
            footnote-policy: auto;
            footnote-display: compact;
        }

        .footnote::footnote-call {
            color: red;
            font-size: 30px;
        }
        
        .footnote::footnote-marker {
            color: blue;
        }

        p{ 
            font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif;
            margin-top: 0; 
            margin-bottom: 0;
            text-align: justify;
            font-size: 14px;
            line-height: 16px;
        }



        .afnanch{ display: none; }

        hr{
            border: none;	
        }

        .pfirst{
            padding-top: 50mm;
        }
    </style>

    

</head>

<body>
        <p>the passage from Xylography to Typography. Those who write on the
            affirmative side of the question profess to see in the earlier typographical works,
            as well as in the historical statements handed down by the
            old authorities, the clearest evidence that wooden types were used, and that several of the most
            famous works of the first printers were executed by their means.</p>

        <p>As regards the latter source of their confidence, it is at least remarkable
            that no single writer of the fifteenth century makes the slightest allusion to the
            use of wooden types. Indeed, it was not till Bibliander, in 1548,<span class="footnote" data-note="04" id="note-04"><em>In Commentatione de ratione
                    communi omnium linguarum et
                    literarum.</em> Tiguri, 1548, p. 80.</span>
            first mentioned
            and described them, that anything professing to be a record on the subject
            existed. “First they cut their letters,” he says, “on wood blocks the size of an
            entire page, but because the labour and cost of that way was so great, they devised
            movable wooden types, perforated and joined one to the other by a thread.”</p>

        <p>The legend, once started, found no lack of sponsors, and the typographical
            histories of the sixteenth century and onward abound with testimonies confirmatory
            more or less of Bibliander’s statement. Of these testimonies, those only
            are worthy of attention which profess to be based on actual inspection of the
            alleged perforated wooden types. Specklin
            (who died in 1589) asserts that he
            saw some of these relics at Strasburg<span class="footnote" data-note="05" id="note-05">In <em>Chronico Argentoratensi</em>, <em>m.s.</em> ed. Jo.
                Schilterus,
                p. 442. “Ich habe die erste press, auch die buchstaben gesehen, waren
                von holtz geschnitten, auch gäntze wörter und syllaben, hatten löchle,
                und fasst man an ein schnur nacheinander mit einer nadel, zoge sie
                darnach den zeilen in die länge,” etc.</span>. Angelo Roccha,<span
                class="footnote" data-note="06" id="note-06"><em>De Bibliothecâ Vaticanâ.</em> Romæ, 1591, p. 412.
                “Characteres enim a primis illis inventoribus non ita eleganter et
                expedite, ut a nostris fieri solet, sed filo in litterarum foramen
                immisso connectebantur, sicut Venetiis id genus typos me vidisse
                memini.”</span>
            in 1591, vouches for the
            existence of similar letters (though he does not say whether wood or metal) at
            Venice. </p>

        
</body>

</html>